HL Deb 15 July 1954 vol 188 cc1119-29

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (LORD LLOYD)

My Lords, this Bill, as its Title suggests, deals with the problem of night working in the baking industry, and, as your Lordships are probably aware, is based upon the recommendations of the Rees Committee which was appointed in 1950, with the approval of both sides of the industry, to examine this problem after prolonged negotiations within the industry itself had failed to produce an acceptable solution. The Minister of Labour announced two years ago that the Government accepted in principle the recommendations which the Committee had put forward unanimously after a very thorough examination of the problem, and he invited the views of the industry to assist in the preparation of this Bill. These views have been very willingly given, and I would emphasise that throughout the preparation of the Bill the Ministry of Labour have had the benefit of full discussions with trade unions and employers' organisations in the industry.

A number of points raised in these discussions are embodied in the Bill as your Lordships see it to-day. It has not, of course, been possible in every single case to meet representations which have been put forward by the industry, but we have attempted to find a solution acceptable to both sides, so far as this was possible without departing from the general principles of the Rees Committee's recommendations. In consequence, therefore, although the Bill may not commend itself in every detail to all parties concerned, it is a constructive effort to deal with what is admittedly a long-standing and apparently intractable problem. I do not propose to weary your Lordships with the history of events leading up to the introduction of this Bill. I think you will be aware that the problem which it tackles has existed for over a century, and that in that period a number of Committees have inquired into it. The Rees Committee, which was the latest, made a most careful and thorough examination of every aspect of the problem, and I am glad to have an opportunity of expressing in your Lordships' House the thanks of the Government for their valuable work which has culminated in the introduction of this Bill.

In examining this problem, the Committee of course not only heard the views of the employers' organisations and the trade unions in the industry but also gave close attention to the needs of the public. At the Committee's request, special surveys were carried out to provide reliable evidence about such questions as how often housewives buy their bread, and what proportion of them prefer it new. After weighing all the evidence, the Committee came to the conclusion that total abolition of night work would cause serious production difficulties in the large "plant" bakeries—that is, those bakeries where a continuous shift system is worked at present. It would also cause some inconvenience to the public and would mean that some bakers would have to raise the price of their bread. On the other hand, they felt that a measure of restriction, based on the principle that no one should be required to work at night for more than half the weeks in the year, was not merely desirable on social grounds but could be introduced with comparatively little dislocation to the industry, without materially affecting the public, and without increasing the price of bread.

The Committee emphasised the need for flexibility in dealing with an industry in which the size of establishments and the methods of production vary so widely. Their main proposal, therefore, was that employers should be required to choose between two systems. Under the first system, employment between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. would be totally prohibited. Under the second system, night work would be permissible but no individual might be employed between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. for more than half the weeks worked in any calendar year. Exceptions were to be allowed for the week-end trade and other specified purposes. The Committee recommended that legislation (which should not apply to master bakers) should be introduced on those lines, but that a period of grace of two years should be granted to allow for the necessary reorganisation in the industry.

At this point, there is a matter of fundamental importance to which I should like briefly to draw your Lordships' attention. In the course of their Report, the Committee emphasised that agreement is always a more suitable method of regulating matters of this kind than legislation can ever be. Personally, I entirely agree with the Committee. As the House knows, it has been our general practice in this country to deal with questions relating to conditions of employment by collective agreements freely negotiated by representatives of employers and workers, rather than by legislation. We have an industrial tradition in this respect which I am sure the House would wish to see maintained so far as is possible. The Pill therefore enables the Minister to exempt from its provisions employers who are covered by an effective voluntary agreement which in his opinion makes the application of the Bill unnecessary.

As an example of what can be done in this respect—and I am glad to see that the noble Lord, Lord Mathers, is here, for he will be proud to know this—an agreement has already been reached in Scotland. As a Sassenach, I am ashamed to have to confess this, but I am told that the industry is better organised in Scotland than in England or Wales. We how to Scotland in this matter of baking, and I feel, speaking for Wales, that what Scotland can do we ought to be able to do also. We hope that this clause in the Bill, which enables people to escape from this legislation if they do make agreements, will draw attention of others to what has been clone in Scotland, and will lead them to follow this example. The Government fully share the hope expressed by the Committee that their Report, and especially the provision in this Bill of which I am speaking, will have the effect of stimulating progress towards an effective system of organisation and joint negotiation and that this will, in the end, lead not merely to agreements on night baking which will enable the parties to be exempted from the Bill but, in time, to agreements on other aspects of conditions of employment, and so to a happier and healthier spirit throughout the whole of this industry. I am sure that in this I speak for all your Lordships on both sides of the House.

Before I come to the provisions of the Bill itself, I think it might be helpful I were to indicate briefly the nature and extent of the problem with which we are dealing. The Rees Committee estimated the number of bakery establishments at which operatives are employed as just over 23,000. The vast majority of these establishments are small or of medium size. Only about l per cent., the Committee estimated, employ over 50 workers, anti 75 per cent. employ less than five. So in this industry we are dealing predominantly with small establishments. The Committee found, however, that the minority of large "plant" bakeries—that is to say, those bakeries that are fully mechanised bakeries, operated on a continuous three-shift system—account for no less than one-third of the country's bread trade. There is a continuing tendency, which had begun even before the war, towards the concentration of bread production in these larger bakeries. The problem of night baking is one which affects directly only about one quarter of the workers in the industry—that is to say, about 28,000 out of an estimated total of between 110,000 and 120,000 people. Of this 28,000, the Committee reckoned that 17,000 at the most are employed on continuous night work; and, as your Lordships are aware, that is the feature which distinguishes the baking industry from others and which is generally regarded as objectionable. There is some evidence that continuous night work is less common now than it was before the war. Nevertheless, the Government recognise that this night work, though limited in extent, represents a hardship which ought, if possible, to be alleviated. That is the purpose of the present Bill.

I do not think it is necessary for me to go into much detail on the separate provisions of the Bill, though I shall, of course, be only too glad to do my best to answer any questions which noble Lords may care to ask. Very briefly, the two alternative systems recommended by the Rees Committee are contained in Clauses 1(1) and 2. The scope of the Bill is set out in Clause 1 (2)—broadly speaking, it applies to bakery workers employed on production processes, but not to foremen or workers engaged on distribution or other types of work. The phrase persons employed under a contract of service or of apprenticeship, which your Lordships will see on the first page, excludes master bakers, and Clause 1(3) similarly excludes the "working directors" of family or other small businesses which have been turned into limited companies. Clause 3 sets out certain special exemptions, recommended by the Rees Committee, which I have already mentioned, for the purpose of dealing with the requirements of the week-end trade, public holidays and unforeseen emergencies. The purpose of Clause 4 is to allow a greater degree of flexibility in administration than would have been possible under the arrangements proposed by the Rees Committee. Its effect is to make it possible to use both systems of working where a simple choice of one system or the other would not meet reasonable requirements.

The only other provisions which I think I need mention now are Clause 9, which contains the very important power to which I have already referred—the power of the Minister to exempt from the Bill employers who are covered by an effective voluntary agreement which, in his opinion, makes the application of the Bill unnecessary—and Clause 13(2), which deals with the date on which the Bill is to come into force. This Bill will, of course, entail certain changes and reorganisation within the industry, and as now drafted it may come into force either at the beginning of 1957, if the Minister makes an order to that effect, or at the beginning of 1958. The intention is to keep the matter under review, and to decide later, in the light of the progress which the industry has made towards meeting the requirements of the Bill, which of these alternative dates should be adopted.

My Lords, in announcing the Government's decision to accept in principle the Rees Committee's recommendations, and to introduce legislation to give effect to them, my right honourable friend the Minister of Labour emphasised that the Government were making a sincere effort to dispose once and for all of a problem which has occupied Parliament on many occasions in the past, and which has done much, I think, to hinder the development of really satisfactory relationships in the baking industry. He added the earnest hope that both sides of the industry would co-operate fully in the steps which the Government proposed to take. I think it is fitting that I should recall these words, and I should like to appeal to both sides of your Lordships' House to approach this long - standing problem in a sympathetic and constructive frame of mind, with a view to arriving at a solution which is in the interest not only of the industry itself but of the country as a whole. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Lloyd.)

6.15 p.m.

LORD AMMON

My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord on the clarity and lucidity of his statement in moving this Bill. It is not usual that the Opposition should have the opportunity of congratulating the Government on having produced a most important piece of social and industrial legislation—in fact, I rather think, whether by accident or design, that the Government have shown remarkable strategy, in that at the tail end of the Session they have introduced two industrial Bills that command a welcome from both sides of the House, even though those Bills have been long overdue. The Government are certainly to be congratulated in that respect. As the noble Lord has said, the problem dealt with by this Bill has perplexed us for many years. I seem to remember it from the very first day that I entered another place. If my memory is not entirely at fault, I believe my noble friend sitting just below me, Lord Haden-Guest, introduced a Bill something on these lines. That was about twenty years ago. I have forgotten now what happened to that Bill.

LORD HADEN-GUEST

It is in the museum.

LORD AMMON

It was evidently the seed that has taken so long to germinate into this plant. Night work in this industry has been a long standing grievance, and to-day a considerable step has been taken towards remedying it. As has been said, the Rees Committee was appointed in 1950 and its Report was delivered in 1951, so the matter has had time to mature. I think I am right in saying that, with perhaps two exceptions only, the recommendations of the Committee have been fully discharged in this Bill. It would be ungracious not to admit that fact, or to omit to thank the Government for an excellent piece of industrial and social legislation.

I do not propose to keep these "crowded" Benches waiting much longer, because there will be another opportunity to speak on the Committee stage. As the provisions of the Bill have been well explained by the noble Lord opposite, and as both sides are anxious to get the Bill on the Statute Book as soon as possible, it is not necessary to speak for very long on the subject. I do, however, wish to give notice to the noble Lord that I intend to put down two Amendments on the Committee stage—one to Clause 1, and one, I think, to Clause 7, which deals with the question of subjective and objective tests concerning inspectors. That question was brought up at the last moment when there was a hurry to get the Bill from another place to your Lordships' House. There was a long discussion on it, in which I believe the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack took part. As the Minister who is responsible for the production of this Bill is also, a lawyer, ordinary people did not have much say in it. So far as I can understand, the matter seems to have been quite clear to the ordinary man when the Bill was first introduced; now it is clear only to the lawyers. It is in an endeavour once again to make this Bill clear to ordinary people that I shall move an Amendment to the Bill on the Committee stage. I think I need only repeat that I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd, and, with the hearty approval of all noble Lords on this side, commend this Bill to your Lordships in the hope that effect will soon be given to its provisions.

6.18 p.m.

LORD HADEN-GUEST

My Lords, as my name has been mentioned, perhaps I should say how glad I am that a Bill of this kind has been introduced at this stage, although it was refused at the time when I originally introduced it in another place. At that time I was asked by a deputation of bakers in this area to introduce a Bill. The conditions then were extremely bad. My feeling about the matter is that although this measure certainly effects an improvement in the present state of affairs, it still allows 50 per cent. of bakers to be employed on night work—I think that point is dealt with in Clause 3. That proportion represents a very large number, and I think the matter will have to be very carefully watched, to see that people do not go on with the old system because it is convenient to the master bakers, rather than adopt a new system which would certainly be an improvement and ought to be adopted. I am told that in another area close to this, called Scotland, they have practically solved the problem. I trust that we in London will also be able to solve the problem. It is something which ought to be done, and it would be a very good thing if this House would do it.

6.20 p.m.

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, the noble Lord has said that this Bill is based mainly on the findings of the Rees Committee which sat as recently (observe the term I am using) as 1950. It would therefore seem that the bakers are to be especially fortunate in having a Bill to remedy their grievances so quickly after such a Committee has sat. It would be a mistake if we understood that 1950 was the beginning of the agitation for the abolition of night baking. The struggle to secure this reform goes back very much further—indeed, at the first annual conference of my Party that I attended, in the year 1903, the Bakers' Union had tabled a Motion for the agenda, and at that conference I had the first opportunity in my career of voting in favour of the abolition of night baking, or at any rate the conditions surrounding night baking. So it has been a long process, and one in which much water has flowed under the bridges of the world.

A former Member of your Lordships' House, Lord Passfield, in his younger days addressed a meeting which I attended, and warned us not to be optimistic on the question of reforms. It was he who said that from the first mention of a particular reform it takes a period of twenty-five years for the British public to approve it. He meant that it is little use talking to the present generation for reforms for the present generation; but that if you can address yourself to the young, then, by the time they reach years of discretion, they will be willing to grant it. One other point of biographical detail: in the year 1908 I went to the city of Dundee to carry out the work of my Party, and the chairman of the Party in that city was a Scottish baker. I well remember, over supper on the first night, the emphasis he placed upon the need for improving conditions in Scotland. They were, indeed, worse than they had been in England, because the Scots dearly love their morning roll; and in order that their morning roll could be on the breakfast table quite early, bakers had to work through the night. I visit Scotland only occasionally these days, but I hope that, even if the Scots continue to love their rolls, they will be content if they have to be made at a time which would make it unnecessary for work to be carried on throughout the night.

The noble Lord, Lord Lloyd, spoke of the work of his Ministry, indicating that they had been striving for lone to secure, where possible, voluntary agreements between employers and employed. He felt convinced that, if voluntary agreements could be reached, that would be an advantage all round. I fully agree, especially in these days, when both employers and work people are strongly organised, for they are in a position to speak on equal terms. But in my young days, when the degree of organisation among working people was less powerful than among the employers, we had to depend upon our appeals to Parliament to give us legislation in order that we might have better conditions of life. The first fifteen years of my life was spent in a shop, or rather in a number of shops, and when I first entered shop life there was no such thing as half-day closing. Here and there, in different localities where there were enlightened shopkeepers, voluntary arrangements were made; but they were difficult to maintain, because shopkeepers broke away from agreements, thinking that perhaps they were losing trade as a consequence.

The whole of our efforts in those days were devoted to seeking from Members of Parliament legislation for a weekly half-day for shop assistants. I wind up, speaking in this respect also for the Trades Union Congress, or indeed for what the T.U.C. stands for, by saying this. While it may still be necessary to come to Parliament for reforms of this character, if employers and employed, through their accredited representatives, can reach agreements, that is the most valuable thing, because, after all, Parliament has a great many other things to do. We warmly support this Bill.

LORD REA

My Lords, I should like very briefly but sincerely to support this Bill from these Benches. In passing, perhaps I may offer the noble Lord, Lord Ammon, a little comfort, for there is one statement in the Bill which strikes me as a gem of clarity which will not require any Amendment from him. I refer to Clause 11. It says there: 'night bakery worker' means a person employed as a bakery worker at a night-bakery.

6.26 p.m.

LORD LLOYD

The noble Lord, Lord Ammon, complained that the Bill could not be understood by anyone but a lawyer. The noble Lord, Lord Rea, rather complained that parts of the Bill were so simple that they could be understood by any child. Therefore the Bill is, like all good Bills, a compromise between many things. It is undoubtedly a compromise between three things: the requirements of the public, the requirements of the employers and the requirements of the workers. It will probably not give complete satisfaction to everybody. As the noble Lord, Lord Haden-Guest, said, half the bakers will still be on night work—though that is only true in a sense; strictly speaking, the truth is that a number of bakers will be on night work for half the year. It will not work out that anyone is permanently on night work.

LORD HADEN-GUEST

I did not mean to suggest that, but merely that it is still possible for a man to be on night work for that period.

LORD LLOYD

I merely wanted to make sure that that was clear. I am grateful to noble Lords, and gratified at the welcome they have given to this Bill. I am also grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ammon, for giving me an indication of the Amendments he proposes to move on the next stage. We shall be very ready to look into them as soon as we see what they are.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.